Rod & Staff vs Climbing to Good English

[mamamag5]

Anyone used either of these? Can anyone tell me how these two compare? From what I see they are very similar but Climbing to Good English(CTGE) is workbook format where Rod and Staff is do orally or fill it out on separate sheet of paper. I am overwhelmed with teacher intensive curriculum and need to have my kids be able to work more independently so I am leaning towards using CTGE, but want them to have a thorough coverage of grammar and writing instruction. Any comments, suggestions would be greatly appreciated.

Thanks,
Shirley

[GinainMD]

I've used both. Climbing to Good English for 1st grade and Rod and Staff after. I prefer Rod and Staff. It does involve the parents more but really doesn't take long to complete. I have one dd who has an aversion to workbooks and one who will use anything I throw her way and they both prefer Rod and Staff. Hope that helps.

[arstephia]

The Rod and Staff doesn't have to take that long and I really like the oral aspect of it. Nothing is more frustrating to a child then to be halfway through (or completed) a workbook page WRONG. The oral aspect of Rod and Staff assures both teacher and child that they know the information and can go on to the independent work. I always do oral ODDS (so I can go back and do evens if they need more practice) so that saves time, and I use a white board sometimes for that as well. It isn't as teacher intense as it may look. It just takes a few minutes.

[annaz]

I'm going to try CTGE this year. I have 5 & 6th level and ordering 4th to back up a bit. First, I like the workbook format. Second, dd needs to "see the work" on the page as apposed to a list of sentences to pick out a word like R&S. CTGE seems to be more filling in than simply choosing words, KWIM? So we will go this route. You can still do oral work with CTGE if you so desire. But dd gets nothing out of just doing oral work. It's in one ear and out the other. And putting answers on a separate sheet are very disconnected for both her and myself because we can't see the lesson as a whole. Maybe that's a spacial thing. I also like that CTGE has a Handbook in the back, so we know exactly where to look up terms if needed rather than flipping through an index and back again. And...I prefer the TM layout of CTGE. I like the answers after the questions, not in a list next to it. It's too disconnected for me. I also don't like the TM info at the bottom of the page. I just can't get a handle on that layout. Personal thing for me, obviously.

We tried CLE but it just jumped around way too much. DD and I both have problems with R&S retention and it's more because of set-up than it is content. We tend to tune out a bit, because we go through the motions of doing the work orally, than actually work on and think about the work that is given. Obivously R&S is prettier, but dd doesn't seem to care. CLE would give you independence as well, but I feel it contains some twaddle as we skipped oodles and the writing lacks. (IMO). I feel CTGE is a good alternative if you want workbook format that stays pretty consistent with R&S. If CTGE fails for us, I'll end up creating worksheets for R&S and hilite the heck out of my R&S TM. But I think they'll both get you there and they're both pretty academically level.

[Mom2Monkeys]

I'm going to try CTGE this year. I have 5 & 6th level and ordering 4th to back up a bit. First, I like the workbook format. Second, dd needs to "see the work" on the page as apposed to a list of sentences to pick out a word like R&S. CTGE seems to be more filling in than simply choosing words, KWIM? So we will go this route. You can still do oral work with CTGE if you so desire. But dd gets nothing out of just doing oral work. It's in one ear and out the other. And putting answers on a separate sheet are very disconnected for both her and myself because we can't see the lesson as a whole. Maybe that's a spacial thing. I also like that CTGE has a Handbook in the back, so we know exactly where to look up terms if needed rather than flipping through an index and back again. And...I prefer the TM layout of CTGE. I like the answers after the questions, not in a list next to it. It's too disconnected for me. I also don't like the TM info at the bottom of the page. I just can't get a handle on that layout. Personal thing for me, obviously.

We tried CLE but it just jumped around way too much. DD and I both have problems with R&S retention and it's more because of set-up than it is content. We tend to tune out a bit, because we go through the motions of doing the work orally, than actually work on and think about the work that is given. Obivously R&S is prettier, but dd doesn't seem to care. CLE would give you independence as well, but I feel it contains some twaddle as we skipped oodles and the writing lacks. (IMO). I feel CTGE is a good alternative if you want workbook format that stays pretty consistent with R&S. If CTGE fails for us, I'll end up creating worksheets for R&S and hilite the heck out of my R&S TM. But I think they'll both get you there and they're both pretty academically level.

Rod&Staff already has worksheets It's not for all the lessons, but many of them in each level. There's also the remedial worksheets that cover lots of the topics for 3-5 and 6-8. Good for review or catching up or what ever.